How Many People Have You Been With?

[quote]batman730 wrote:

Well, it’s more of a visceral impression than a hard and fast checklist I run through. Very much like when you’re deciding whether or not you trust someone you just met. It’s not necessarily evidence based, but it’s generally accurate.

Attempting to break it down a little, here’s what I’ve noticed. these women’s issues generally centre around excessive pleasure/attention seeking behaviour and inability to establish and respect adequate boundaries. What this looks like, IME: excessively “open” body language, especially in settings where it’s not particularly appropriate (i.e. work vs the club), tendency to encroach on personal space, tendency to give TMFI and/or ask excessively personal questions and put people on the spot, deliberately creating uncomfortable situations, need to monopolize attention and conversation in group settings, binge behaviour of all kinds (eating, drinking, partying, spending, sex, drugs etc), high risk behaviours (sexual and otherwise), making major presumptions about people’s (especially, but not exclusively guys’) willingness to put up with generally socially unacceptable behaviour, chronic lateness and general unreliability, addiction issues, frequent significant life changes, disproportionate number of male acquaintances (“beta orbiters” for the Game oriented), difficulty spending time alone (need an audience), continuing to actively cultivate new male acquaintances when in a relationship, difficulty maintaining healthy female friendships, forming inappropriate, although not necessarily explicitly sexual, relationships with males in positions of authority (bosses, teachers etc), seeming inability to flirt without coming across like they “mean it”, history of dysfunctional sexual conduct and/or abuse, relevant to this thread a large number of sexual partners and often an early first sexual experience.

There are more, but this should get you started. I’m sure some out there would say this describes the majority of girls/women aged 17-24. I can’t say, as I rarely hang out with women in that age group anymore. I would say however that more girls are trying to be this girl than actually are this woman. If they practice long enough though, it probably doesn’t matter.

Out of curiosity, are you asking so you can find this woman, or so you can avoid her?

Edited[/quote]

Very nice. I always enjoy reading your posts when you “break it down,” and it doesn’t seem to matter much to me what it is you’re breaking down.

I would say that from my experience in working with girls and women there are plenty of girls in their teens and early twenties who do not display these characteristics. I tend to encounter the women you describe after they’ve had a child and are continuing to experience relationship instability and drama, but of course that makes sense because the girls displaying these characteristics are having all sorts of fun with it until they have a kid, so don’t need a therapist, while the girls who are more earnest and steadfast will struggle with breakups of early LTRs and other age-appropriate angst and anxiety (grades, don’t know how to interact with boys, etc). The earnest girls tend not to have a need for me in their late twenties.

Other than that I would only add that I think some of the characteristics you mention would be red flags I would offer to young women looking to avoid making a poor choice in men. It’s funny to me that some of what you laid out also describes PUAs and their game.

I am basically pro-fornication.

fwiw~

[quote]

I feel I’m wasting my time here. You’re convinced, I’m convinced. Have fun thinking that men and women are exactly the same despite overwhelming historical, anthropological, biological, psychological, and empirical evidence that suggests otherwise. Knock yourself out - I simply don’t have time to go tit for tat with you any longer. [/quote]

We both are, have fun with you’re wildly broad generalizations… This single paragraph shows you’ve missed the point entirely. I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.

[quote]batman730 wrote:
frequent significant life changes, disproportionate number of male acquaintances (“beta orbiters” for the Game oriented), difficulty spending time alone (need an audience), continuing to actively cultivate new male acquaintances when in a relationship, difficulty maintaining healthy female friendships, forming inappropriate, although not necessarily explicitly sexual, relationships with males in positions of authority (bosses, teachers etc), seeming inability to flirt without coming across like they “mean it”
[/quote]
This paragraph here is my ex in a nutshell. To a T.

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

That is also how the thread (the portions I’ve read anyway) read to me.

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.
[/quote]
I think that has genuinely been his experience.

[quote]Testy1 wrote:
I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

As do I, Testy…as do I~

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

That is also how the thread (the portions I’ve read anyway) read to me. [/quote]

His thesis is “When a woman has slept with (X)+ amount of men she becomes a slut (ie unmarriable).
I have slept with (x)+ women; however, I am a man and this rule does not apply to men.”

If that’s not what you got from it then re-read csulli.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.
[/quote]
I think that has genuinely been his experience.[/quote]

And the experience of the last 6000-1000 years of men who actually had the experience to draw comparisons.

Either, they were all wrong, or our whole new, all improved, gender is a social construct, egalitarianism is horseshit.

Given that we are all super, duper, extra special, it clearly must be the former.

[quote]MementoMori wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

That is also how the thread (the portions I’ve read anyway) read to me. [/quote]

His thesis is “When a woman has slept with (X)+ amount of women she becomes a slut (ie unmarriable).
I have slept with (x)+ women; however, I am a man and this rule does not apply to men.”

If that’s not what you got from it then re-read csulli. [/quote]

Yup.

In related news 2+2=4.

Its all terribly oppressive, thats what it is.

[quote]
And the experience of the last 6000-1000 years of men who actually had the experience to draw comparisons.

Either, they were all wrong, or our whole new, all improved, gender is a social construct, egalitarianism is horseshit.

Given that we are all super, duper, extra special, it clearly must be the former. [/quote]

I could use the same argument to justify slavery, apartheid, drawing on cave walls and shitting into the rivers I drink out of.

I’ll have no part of it thanks.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

Well, it’s more of a visceral impression than a hard and fast checklist I run through. Very much like when you’re deciding whether or not you trust someone you just met. It’s not necessarily evidence based, but it’s generally accurate.

Attempting to break it down a little, here’s what I’ve noticed. these women’s issues generally centre around excessive pleasure/attention seeking behaviour and inability to establish and respect adequate boundaries. What this looks like, IME: excessively “open” body language, especially in settings where it’s not particularly appropriate (i.e. work vs the club), tendency to encroach on personal space, tendency to give TMFI and/or ask excessively personal questions and put people on the spot, deliberately creating uncomfortable situations, need to monopolize attention and conversation in group settings, binge behaviour of all kinds (eating, drinking, partying, spending, sex, drugs etc), high risk behaviours (sexual and otherwise), making major presumptions about people’s (especially, but not exclusively guys’) willingness to put up with generally socially unacceptable behaviour, chronic lateness and general unreliability, addiction issues, frequent significant life changes, disproportionate number of male acquaintances (“beta orbiters” for the Game oriented), difficulty spending time alone (need an audience), continuing to actively cultivate new male acquaintances when in a relationship, difficulty maintaining healthy female friendships, forming inappropriate, although not necessarily explicitly sexual, relationships with males in positions of authority (bosses, teachers etc), seeming inability to flirt without coming across like they “mean it”, history of dysfunctional sexual conduct and/or abuse, relevant to this thread a large number of sexual partners and often an early first sexual experience.

There are more, but this should get you started. I’m sure some out there would say this describes the majority of girls/women aged 17-24. I can’t say, as I rarely hang out with women in that age group anymore. I would say however that more girls are trying to be this girl than actually are this woman. If they practice long enough though, it probably doesn’t matter.

Out of curiosity, are you asking so you can find this woman, or so you can avoid her?

Edited[/quote]

Very nice. I always enjoy reading your posts when you “break it down,” and it doesn’t seem to matter much to me what it is you’re breaking down.

I would say that from my experience in working with girls and women there are plenty of girls in their teens and early twenties who do not display these characteristics. I tend to encounter the women you describe after they’ve had a child and are continuing to experience relationship instability and drama, but of course that makes sense because the girls displaying these characteristics are having all sorts of fun with it until they have a kid, so don’t need a therapist, while the girls who are more earnest and steadfast will struggle with breakups of early LTRs and other age-appropriate angst and anxiety (grades, don’t know how to interact with boys, etc). The earnest girls tend not to have a need for me in their late twenties.

Other than that I would only add that I think some of the characteristics you mention would be red flags I would offer to young women looking to avoid making a poor choice in men. It’s funny to me that some of what you laid out also describes PUAs and their game.

[/quote]

That’s very kind Ms. Q. I always enjoy reading your thoughts as well.

I would definitely agree that the reason you don’t see more of “that” girl in therapy until she gets a little older is that being "that"girl doesn’t really seem like a problem until you the consequences start to come home to roost (i.e. unplanned pregnancies/kids, ongoing drama, STI’s, inability to sustain a relationship etc.). Nobody has a gambling problem while they’re winning.

However I think it goes beyond just “having all sorts of fun with it” (although definitely that’s a factor). These girls experience genuine power through their ability to manipulate people and situations through their sexuality. Unfortunately for them, they seem to lack the power to control their own actions. I am glad to hear that there are still plenty of girls who don’t fall into that trap.

I would also agree that most of these characteristics would be “red flags” in a man. I can assure you that “that” guy would receive a very frosty reception at my door if he came to call on my daughter (many, MANY years from now ;)). That said, while I see it a bit differently, I can somewhat appreciate AC’s point about how certain actions may reflect differently on someone based on their gender.

It’s unwise for a guy to get into fist fights. It’s a “red flag”, but it happens. Hence “boys will be boys” and all that. However if a girl gets into fist fights (which they obviously do from time to time) I can see how it could potentially be viewed as more of a red flag, by virtue of being further outside the range of “normal” conduct for a girl than for a guy. Isn’t aberrant behaviour only aberrant by virtue of how far it deviates from the norm?

Men and women generally exist at opposite poles. It’s not good for either to get to far out to either extreme, but maybe it’s cause for greater concern if one goes to the opposite extreme?

Hmmm… I’m actually not sure where I come down on this yet.

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:
frequent significant life changes, disproportionate number of male acquaintances (“beta orbiters” for the Game oriented), difficulty spending time alone (need an audience), continuing to actively cultivate new male acquaintances when in a relationship, difficulty maintaining healthy female friendships, forming inappropriate, although not necessarily explicitly sexual, relationships with males in positions of authority (bosses, teachers etc), seeming inability to flirt without coming across like they “mean it”
[/quote]
This paragraph here is my ex in a nutshell. To a T.[/quote]

Yea, we’ve discussed this before. I’m pretty sure you dated my evil ex’s evil twin (or evil younger sister at least, given that I’m old and you’re not). To be fair, she wasn’t full evil, but I’ve definitely BTDT.

I feel your pain Brother haha…

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

I don’t believe I used the words, “never be marriage material”. I believe I said there needs to be some serious compensating factors and a track record of CHANGE for her to be considered.

But if you all want to MARRY a slut, KNOCK YOUR SELF OUT! I can recommend a great divorce attorney. Boggles my little brain when people throw common fucking sense out the window just be politically correct. What ever - it’s YOUR assets at risk, not mine.

[quote]MementoMori wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

That is also how the thread (the portions I’ve read anyway) read to me. [/quote]

His thesis is “When a woman has slept with (X)+ amount of men she becomes a slut (ie unmarriable).
I have slept with (x)+ women; however, I am a man and this rule does not apply to men.”

If that’s not what you got from it then re-read csulli. [/quote]

How about YOU stop telling people what MY opinion is, mmmmkay?

I said, and I’m repeating myself, that there needs to be some serious compensating factors. You seemed to gloss over that statement. which is fine in YOUR interpretation, but kindly keep my name out of your fucking mouth.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

and a track record of CHANGE for her to be considered.
[/quote]

There, THIS is what I can agree with.

Past behavior, his or hers, isn’t the issue. Present and near-past are. Depending on age I would expect the length of time to be shorter or longer for reform.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

I don’t believe I used the words, “never be marriage material”. I believe I said there needs to be some serious compensating factors and a track record of CHANGE for her to be considered.

But if you all want to MARRY a slut, KNOCK YOUR SELF OUT! I can recommend a great divorce attorney. Boggles my little brain when people throw common fucking sense out the window just be politically correct. What ever - it’s YOUR assets at risk, not mine.[/quote]

That statement still stands for either gender. The only real male sluts (I only use that term because that is what we call women playa’s right) I know are on their third or fourth marriage.

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I’ll judge people by experience, not anatomy.
[/quote]
That’s exactly what he’s doing too. I’m surprised you don’t understand.[/quote]

I’m surprised that is what you get from it. I read it as if you are a female slut you will never be marriage material, if you are male with the same standards it doesn’t factor in to it.

FWIW I know women that were very slutty that have been married twenty plus years. It depends on the person regardless of gender.

I use slut as an endearment btw.
[/quote]

I don’t believe I used the words, “never be marriage material”. I believe I said there needs to be some serious compensating factors and a track record of CHANGE for her to be considered.

But if you all want to MARRY a slut, KNOCK YOUR SELF OUT! I can recommend a great divorce attorney. Boggles my little brain when people throw common fucking sense out the window just be politically correct. What ever - it’s YOUR assets at risk, not mine.[/quote]

That statement still stands for either gender. The only real male sluts (I only use that term because that is what we call women playa’s right) I know are on their third or fourth marriage.
[/quote]

You are missing the point. In a perfect little world, WHO CARES if a marriage fails? If two people go their own separate ways, washed their hands of each other and waved bye, this discussion would be meaningless.

The issue is, WOMEN TAKE HALF.

So it is FAR FAR FAR more important for a man to be extra careful about a woman he marries than it is for a woman to be careful about who she marries. As long as he’s not beating her ass every night, she’ll be fine in the long run.

How can you people not see this?

It is NOT the same! Men and women are DIFFERENT, and they are treated DIFFERENTLY in court. Does anyone care to challenge that statement? But I’m just a misogynistic asshole with a double standard, right? What am I missing here?